Empty end hits first, dispersing a lot of force. Motor end rotates around still carrying a lot of force and impacts leaving a second crater.
Or am I missing something that makes this newsworthy?
Or am I missing something that makes this newsworthy?
At least one early rocket design (Atlas) had fuel tanks so insubstantial that they had to be pressurized until they were loaded with fuel on the pad, and a loss of pressure could be expensive...
See the fighter jet vs concrete wall video [1]. That was going at 500mph, and notice how the tail of the craft doesn't even perceptibly slow down. And a change in velocity would be required for the tail to rotate around (whether the impact is on an angle or head on)
This space object was travelling at 5800mph, 11+ times the speed. Sure a meter or so of moon dust may be a bit softer, but its solid rock underneath right? I'd guess the equivalent would be putting a kitchen sponge between that fighter jet & concrete wall.
In reality, the motor end should hit first, since free-falling objects usually rotate in such a way that the heaviest part is positioned at the bottom. The atmosphere could influence and modify this behaviour on other celestial bodies, but the Moon does not have it.
Interesting. How does that happen without atmosphere? I thought the atmosphere is what creates this effect in the first place.